Professional Documents
Culture Documents
COMMENTARY. For the article What happens to genes in duplicated genomes, by Elizabeth A. Kellogg, which appeared
in issue 8, April 15, 2003, of Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
(100, 4369 4371; First Published April 7, 2003; 10.1073
pnas.0831050100), the pull quote in the second column on page
4370 read Subfunctionalization occurs in some genes and is not
an immediate product of polyploidization. It should have read
Subfunctionalization occurs in some genes and is an immediate
product of polyploidization. This error occurred during the
editorial process and is not the fault of the author. PNAS regrets
this error.
CELL BIOLOGY. For the article Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells, by Muhammad Al-Hajj, Max S.
Wicha, Adalberto Benito-Hernandez, Sean J. Morrison, and
Michael F. Clarke, which appeared in issue 7, April 1, 2003, of
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (100, 39833988; First Published
March 10, 2003; 10.1073pnas.0530291100), the authors note
that the following statement was inadvertently omitted from the
acknowledgements: The results of this study support a patentpending technology that is exclusively licensed to Cancer Stem
Cell Genomics (CSCG) in which the authors and the University
of Michigan have a financial interest.
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.1131491100
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.1232295100
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.1232296100
www.pnas.org
CORRECTIONS
BIOCHEMISTRY. For the article 3-Acetoxyandrost-1,5-diene17-ethylene ketal functions as a potent antiandrogen with
marginal agonist activity, by Hiroshi Miyamoto, Padma
Marwah, Ashok Marwah, Henry Lardy, and Chawnshang
Chang, which appeared in issue 8, April 15, 2003, of Proc. Natl.
Acad. Sci. USA (100, 4440 4444; First Published April 2, 2003,
Fig. 1. The structures of DHEA derivatives and effects on AR transcriptional activity. (A) The structures of compounds nos. 5, 10, 14, 15, 16, and 17, DHEA, Adiol,
testosterone, and DHT. (B) PC-3 cells were transfected with the WT AR expression plasmid pSG5-AR and MMTV-Luc. After transfection, cells were cultured for
24 h with 1 nM DHT or 1,000 nM of various DHEA derivatives. The Luc activity is presented relative to that of EtOH treatment (white bar; set as 1-fold). Values
represent the mean SD of at least three determinations. (C) PC-3 cells were transfected with the pSG5-AR and MMTV-Luc. After transfection, cells were cultured
for 24 h with various concentrations of compounds nos. 5, 10 (ADEK), 14, or 16 in the presence of 1 nM DHT. The Luc activity is presented relative to that in the
presence of DHT (black bar; set as 100%). Values represent the mean SD of at least three determinations.
www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.1232068100
SEE COMMENTARY
CELL BIOLOGY
Origin
Formation in
mice
Passage in
mice
Diagnosis
Metastasis
Breast primary
Metastasis
Metastasis
Metastasis
Metastasis
Metastasis
Metastasis
Metastasis
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Mice were injected with unsorted T1 and T3 cells and a 2-mm piece of T2. Cells from T4 T9 were isolated by
flow cytometry as described in Fig. 1. All nine tumors tested engrafted in our NODSCID mouse model. Except for
T2, which was a primary breast tumor, all other tumors were metastases. All of the tumors were passaged serially
in mice except for T4.
volume) and injected into the area of the mammary fat pad as
described above. Nexaban was used to seal the injection site.
Cell Staining for Flow Cytometry. Cells were counted and then
2 105
02
22
02
22
02
22
02
22
16
66
02
22
02
22
02
22
02
22
16
66
8
Passaged T1
CD44
CD44
B38.1
B38.1
CD24
CD24
Passaged T2
CD44
CD44
B38.1
B38.1
CD24
CD24
105
Al-Hajj et al.
SEE COMMENTARY
Table 3. Tumorigenic breast cancer cells were highly enriched in the ESACD44CD24/low population
Tumorsinjections
Mouse passage 1
Unsorted
CD44CD24
CD44CD24/low
CD44CD24/lowESA
CD44CD24/lowESA
Mouse passage 2
CD44CD24
CD44CD24/low
Patients tumor cells
CD44CD24
CD44CD24/low
CD44CD24/lowESA
CD44CD24/lowESA
5 105
105
5 104
2 104
104
5 103
103
500
200
100
88
88
1010
010
1010
312
010
1010
014
1414
012
010
1010
1010*
010*
44
04
44
04
16
06
09
99
03
33
04
44
08
113
1113
02
11
22
22
22
02
CELL BIOLOGY
Cells were isolated from passage 1 (Mouse passage 1) T1, T2, and T3, passage 2 (Mouse passage 2) T3, and unpassaged (Patients tumor cells) T1, T4, T5, T6,
T8, and T9. CD44CD24Lineage populations and CD44CD24/lowLineage cells were isolated by flow cytometry as described in Fig. 1. The indicated number
of cells of each phenotype was injected into the breast of NODSCID mice. The frequency of tumorigenic cells calculated by the modified maximum likelihood
analysis method is 5105 if single tumorigenic cells were capable of forming tumors, and every transplanted tumorigenic cell gave rise to a tumor (33). Therefore,
this calculation may underestimate the frequency of the tumorigenic cells because it does not take into account cell cell interactions and local environmental
factors that may influence engraftment. In addition to the markers that are shown, all sorted cells in all experiments were Lineage, and the tumorigenic cells
from T1, T2, and T3 were further selected as B38.1. The mice were observed weekly for 4 6.5 mo, or until the mice became sick from the tumors.
*Two thousand cells were injected in these experiments.
Tumor formation by 5,000 T5 ESACD44CD24/lowLineage cells was detected 8 9 wk after injections, whereas tumor formation by 5,000 T5
ESACD44CD24/lowLineage cells was detected 10 12 wk after injections.
passaged tumors (T1, T2, and T3) or from unpassaged cancer cells
obtained directly from patients (T1, T4T6, T8, and T9), they were
enriched for tumorigenic activity. Note that T7 was the only one of
nine cancers studied that did not fit this pattern (Fig. 1f ). Other than
T7, CD24Lineage cancer cells in both unpassaged and passaged
tumors were unable to form new tumors (Table 3). Therefore, the
xenograft and unpassaged patient tumors were composed of similar
populations of phenotypically diverse cancer cell types, and in both
cases only the CD44CD24/lowLineage cells had the capacity to
proliferate to form new tumors (P 0.001).
In three of the tumors, further enrichment of tumorigenic
activity was possible by isolating the ESA subset of the
CD44CD24/low population. ESA has been used in the past to
distinguish epithelial cancer cells from benign reactive mesothelial cells (20). When ESACD44CD24/low Lineage cells were
isolated from passaged T1, as few as 200 cells consistently
formed tumors of 1 cm between 5 and 6 mo after injection,
whereas 2,000 ESACD44CD24/lowLineage cells or 20,000
CD44CD24 cells always failed to form tumors (Table 3). Ten
thousand unsorted cells formed tumors in only 3 of 12 mice. This
result suggests that the ESACD44CD24/low Lineage population was 50-fold enriched for the ability to form tumors
relative to unfractionated tumor cells (Table 3). The
ESACD44CD24/lowLineage population accounted for
24% of passage 1 T1 cells (2.55% of cancer cells). The
ESACD44CD24/lowLineage population (0.6% of cancer
cells) from unpassaged T5 cells was also enriched for tumorigenic activity, compared with ESACD44CD24/low Lineage
cells, but both the ESA and ESA fractions had some tumorigenic activity (Table 3). Among unpassaged T5 cells, as few as
1,000 ESACD44CD24/lowLineage cells consistently formed
tumors.
To determine whether the difference in tumorigenicity of the
cell populations was due to differences in cell cycle, we analyzed
these populations by flow cytometry. Comparison of the cell
cycle status of tumorigenic and nontumorigenic cancer cells
from T1 revealed that both exhibited a similar cell cycle distribution (Fig. 2). Therefore, neither population was enriched for
Fig. 3. Histology from the CD24 injection site (a; 20 objective magnification) revealed only normal mouse tissue, whereas the CD24/low injection site (b;
40 objective magnification) contained malignant cells. (c) A representative tumor in a mouse at the CD44CD24/lowLineage injection site, but not at the
CD44CD24Lineage injection site. T3 cells were stained with Papanicolaou stain and examined microscopically (100 objective). Both the nontumorigenic (d)
and tumorigenic (e) populations contained cells with a neoplastic appearance, with large nuclei and prominent nucleoli.
3986 www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0530291100
Al-Hajj et al.
SEE COMMENTARY
cells at a particular stage of the cell cycle, and the nontumorigenic cells were able to undergo at least a limited number of
divisions in the xenograft model.
Six months after injection, the injection sites of 20,000 tumorigenic CD44CD24/lowLineage cells and 20,000 nontumorigenic
CD44CD24Lineage cells were examined by histology. The
CD44CD24/lowLineage injection sites contained tumors 1 cm
in diameter, whereas the CD44CD24Lineage injection sites
contained no detectable tumors (Fig. 3c). Only normal mouse
mammary tissue was seen by histology at the sites of the
CD44CD24Lineage injections (Fig. 3a), whereas the tumors
formed by CD44CD24/lowLineage cells contained malignant
cells as judged by hematoxylin and eosin-stained sections (Fig. 3b).
Even when CD44CD24Lineage injection sites from 58 mice
(each administered 1,00050,000 cells) were examined after 1629
wk, no tumors were detected. Furthermore, the tumorigenic and
nontumorigenic populations were indistinguishable morphologically. Both the tumorigenic and nontumorigenic subsets of Lineage cells from passaged and unpassaged tumors contained
95% cancer cells as judged by Wright staining or Papanicolaou
staining and microscopic analysis. By histology, the CD44CD24/low
Lineage cells and the rest of the Lineage cells had the
appearances of epithelial cancer cells (Fig. 3 d and e).
The Tumorigenic Population Is Capable of Generating the Phenotypic
Heterogeneity Found in the Initial Tumor. The ability of small
Al-Hajj et al.
CELL BIOLOGY
Fig. 4. Phenotypic diversity in tumors arising from CD44CD24/lowLineage cells. The plots depict the CD24 and CD44 or ESA staining patterns of live human
Lineage cancer cells from T1 (a, c, and e) or T2 (b, d, and f ). T1 CD44Lineage cells (a) or T2 Lineage cells (b) were obtained from tumors that had been passaged
once in NODSCID mice. ESACD44CD24/lowLineage tumorigenic cells from T1 (c) or CD44CD24/lowLineage tumorigenic cells from T2 (d) were isolated and
injected into the breasts of NODSCID mice; e and f depict analyses of the tumors that arose from these cells. In both cases, the tumorigenic cells formed tumors
that contained phenotypically diverse cells similar to those observed in the original tumor.
We thank Mark Kukaruga and Ann Marie Deslaurier for flow cytometry, Steve Ethier for tumor specimens, and Brian Clarke for the
mathematical calculation of the frequency of tumorigenic cancer cells.
This work was supported by National Cancer Institute Grant CA-075136.
Flow cytometry was supported by National Cancer Institute Grant
CA-46592.
1. Stockler, M., Wilcken, N. R., Ghersi, D. & Simes, R. J. (2000) Cancer Treat. Rev.
26, 151168.
2. Schultz, L. B. & Weber, B. L. (1999) Curr. Opin. Oncol. 11, 429434.
3. Aubele, M. & Werner, M. (1999) Anal. Cell Pathol. 19, 5358.
4. Golub, T. R. (2001) N. Engl. J. Med. 344, 601602.
5. Heppner, G. H. (1984) Cancer Res. 44, 22592265.
6. Wodinsky, I., Swiniarski, J. & Kensler, C. J. (1967) Cancer Chemother. Rep. 51,
415421.
7. Southam, C. & Brunschwig, A. (1961) Cancer 14, 971978.
8. Hamburger, A. W. & Salmon, S. E. (1977) Science 197, 461463.
9. Fialkow, P. J. (1976) Birth Defects Orig. Artic. Ser. 12, 123132.
10. Bergsagel, D. E. & Valeriote, F. A. (1968) Cancer Res. 28, 21872196.
11. Weisenthal, L. & Lippman, M. E. (1985) Cancer Treat. Rep. 69, 615632.
12. Reya, T., Morrison, S. J., Clarke, M. F. & Weissman, I. L. (2001) Nature 414,
105111.
13. Lapidot, T., Sirard, C., Vormoor, J., Murdoch, B., Hoang, T., CaceresCortes, J., Minden, M., Paterson, B., Caligiuri, M. & Dick, J. (1994)
Nature 17, 645 648.
14. Bonnet, D. & Dick, J. (1997) Nat. Med. 3, 730737.
15. Larochelle, A., Vormoor, J., Hanenberg, H., Wang, J. C., Bhatia, M., Lapidot,
T., Moritz, T., Murdoch, B., Xiao, X. L., Kato, I., et al. (1996) Nat. Med. 2,
13291337.
16. Sakakibara, T., Xu, Y., Bumpers, H., Chen, F., Bankert, R., Arredondo, M.,
Edge, S. & Repasky, E. (1996) Cancer J. Sci. Am. 2, 291300.
17. Ahrens, T., Sleeman, J., Schempp, C., Howells, N., Hofmann, M., Ponta, H.,
Herrlich, P. & Simon, J. (2001) Oncogene 20, 33993408.
18. Uchida, N., Buck, D., He, D., Reitsma, M., Masek, M., Phan, T., Tsukamoto,
A., Gage, F. & Weissman, I. L. (2000) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97,
1472014725.
19. Kufe, D., Nadler, L., Sargent, L., Shapiro, H., Hand, P., Austion, F., Colcher,
D. & Schlom, J. (1983) Cancer Res. 43, 851857.
20. Packeisen, J., Kaup-Franzen, C. & Knieriem, H. (1999) Hybridoma 18, 3740.
21. Murphy, K., Dennis, A. & Rosen, J. (2000) FASEB J. 14, 22912302.
22. Xu, X. (1999) Nat. Genet. 22, 3743.
23. Fukasawa, K., Weiner, F. & Mai, S. (1997) Oncogene 11, 12951302.
24. Morrison, S. J. & Weissman, I. L. (1994) Immunity 1, 661673.
25. Lagasse, E., Connors, H., Al-Dhalimy, M., Reitsma, M., Dohse, M., Osborne,
L., Wang, X., Finegold, M., Weissman, I. L. & Grompe, M. (2000) Nat. Med.
6, 12291234.
26. Stingl, J., Eaves, C., Kuusk, U. & Emerman, J. (1998) Differentiation 63, 201213.
27. Liu, A., True, L., LaTray, L., Nelson, P., Ellis, W., Vessella, R., Lange, P.,
Hood, L. & van den Engh, G. (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94,
1070510710.
28. Gudjonsson, T., Villadsen, R., Nielsen, H. L., Ronnov-Jessen, L., Bissell, M. J.
& Petersen, O. W. (2002) Genes Dev. 16, 693706.
29. Lagasse, E. & Weissman, I. L. (1997) Cell 89, 10211031.
30. Lagasse, E. & Weissman, I. L. (1994) J. Exp. Med. 179, 10471052.
31. Domen, J., Gandy, K. L. & Weissman, I. L. (1998) Blood 91, 22722282.
32. Zhou, S., Schuetz, J. D., Bunting, K. D., Colapietro, A. M., Sampath, J., Morris,
J. J., Lagutina, I., Grosveld, G. C., Osawa, M., Nakauchi, H. & Sorrentino, B. P.
(2001) Nat. Med. 7, 10281034.
33. Porter, E. H. & Berry, R. J. (1964) Br. J. Cancer 17, 583601.
3988 www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0530291100
Al-Hajj et al.